New 27" iMac with PCIe SSD read/write speed both above 700!

PicnicTutorials

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Dec 29, 2013
546
13
New 27" iMac with PCIe SSD read/write speed both above 700! That's why you get SSD and not fushion. Fusion drive is more like read/write 300/600 (or close to that). I've seen those numbers on vids and posted here. It's just nice to confirm that my just arrived yesterday shows the same.
 

benjai

macrumors member
Oct 1, 2009
76
8
New 27" iMac with PCIe SSD read/write speed both above 700! That's why you get SSD and not fushion.
Why? Because your apps load so much faster on the SSD? I highly doubt you'd notice the difference under day to day usage.

My 3TB fusion is over twice the speed of the SSD in my old iMac yet there's barely any noticeable difference in general usage.
 

yjchua95

macrumors 604
Apr 23, 2011
6,725
231
GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
Why? Because your apps load so much faster on the SSD? I highly doubt you'd notice the difference under day to day usage.

My 3TB fusion is over twice the speed of the SSD in my old iMac yet there's barely any noticeable difference in general usage.
Well you'll definitely notice it if you do 4K video with FCP X.

I went for a 512GB SSD in my 27" for that very reason.
 

AppleFan360

macrumors 68020
Jan 26, 2008
2,198
688
Having a pure SSD system is great and everything but from a cost standpoint its a bit expensive for what you get. I've used both systems (pure SSD and Fusion) and for day-to-day operations, the difference is not really all that huge unless you are working with very large files. With that said though I edited a 2 hour wedding video in 1080p using a Fusion drive and Final Cut Pro X didn't skip a beat.
 

Ddyracer

macrumors 68000
Nov 24, 2009
1,785
31
Why? Because your apps load so much faster on the SSD? I highly doubt you'd notice the difference under day to day usage.

My 3TB fusion is over twice the speed of the SSD in my old iMac yet there's barely any noticeable difference in general usage.
Did you find the ssd more quiet?
 

costabunny

macrumors demi-goddess
May 15, 2008
2,451
48
Weymouth, UK
Why? Because your apps load so much faster on the SSD? I highly doubt you'd notice the difference under day to day usage.

My 3TB fusion is over twice the speed of the SSD in my old iMac yet there's barely any noticeable difference in general usage.
true for most folks. If you are using very large files often, then the all-flash becomes more important.

Fusion has a 128GB SSD part, and if you for example use a lot of large VM's then this means you will start ti hit the HDD side more and thus notice some slowdowns.

e.g. for me the SSD in my iMac is always fast, compared to running them on my other-halves fusion system (I tun 3 VM's regularly in addition to my usual battery of CS5.5 and other apps). each VM is approaching 60+GB

When I didn't use the VM's all the time, then even I think a fusion would have been just as fast :)
 

xsasha92x

macrumors newbie
Jun 24, 2011
21
0
Massachusetts, US
I got my new late 2013 27" iMac 3.5 Ghz i7, 780m, 3TB fusion a couple days ago and I've already decided to return it for a 512 gb ssd model. Since I use bootcamp windows 8.1 on my mac, I noticed subpar performance for a $2,500 computer. My early 2011 MBP 15" 2.3Ghz i7, 6750m feels noticeably faster with my new Samsung 840 EVO 500gb that I just installed. Now I'm going to look into finding an external hard drive for storage :/
 

xraydoc

macrumors demi-god
Oct 9, 2005
7,548
1,744
192.168.1.1
My new machine, received on Tuesday (specs below) is remarkably fast. The 512GB PCIe SSD is two to three times faster than the SATA SSD in my old iMac (2010 model).

It's quite a noticeable difference.
 

IA64

macrumors 6502
Nov 8, 2013
413
0
I wouldn't really care about sequential read/write speed... Anything beyond 300-400MB/s is fine.

What matter is the random 4K read/write IMO and the SM0512F performance in the test is in the range of 20-30Mb/sec which is mediocre to be honest.

 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.